House takes up bill scuttling pistol brace rule amid GOP infighting

WASHINGTON (CN) — Although other legislative business remained stalled Monday as House Republicans worked to quell a revolt within their ranks, the lower chamber moved ahead with a bill that would strike down a recent change to federal gun control regulations.

The House Committee on Rules convened to debate Georgia Congressman Andrew Clyde’s measure even as House Speaker Kevin McCarthy navigated intraparty squabbling spearheaded by the House Freedom Caucus, a voting bloc of some of the lower chamber’s more right-wing lawmakers who in a mutiny last week blocked votes from proceeding on the House floor.

The standoff has stalled several pieces of legislation, including a bill aimed at blocking the government from using federal funds to regulate gas stoves and a separate measure that would increase congressional oversight on federal agencies. However, amid the uncertainty the lower chamber’s rules panel — tasked with bringing legislation to the floor — moved ahead with Clyde’s measure Monday afternoon.

The congressman’s bill, if made law, would roll back a controversial government rulemaking from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives updating the agency's regulations about a type of firearm attachment known as a pistol stabilizing brace.

Democrats framed the move as an effort by Speaker McCarthy to smooth things over with the Freedom Caucus, which counts Clyde among its members.

“We are considering [this bill] because Speaker McCarthy is trying to put down a right-wing rebellion,” said Massachusetts Representative Jim McGovern, the rules panel’s Democratic ranking member. “He has given away everything to a small group of radical Republicans who will continue to demand more and more from him, including letting them dictate exactly what bills come to the floor,” he added.

New York Congressman Jerry Nadler also blasted Republicans for pressing forward with Clyde’s bill despite what he said were reservations about the measure from some GOP lawmakers.

“With the speaker held hostage by a few of his most extreme members, and with the floor at a complete standstill, a deal was struck,” said Nadler, “and here we are on the cusp of a vote by the full House.”

Republicans on the rules panel focused on the bill itself, positioning it as a counter to what they said was executive overreach.

“This change didn’t occur because of a law that Congress passed or a ruling from a judge,” said Virginia Congressman Ben Cline. “Rather, it’s a decision from an unnamed and electorally unaccountable bureaucrat to turn law-abiding Americans into felons with the stroke of a pen.”

The ATF’s new regulations hold that guns fitted with pistol braces allowing them to be fired from the shoulder must be registered as rifles under the National Firearms Act, the federal law which governs private ownership of long guns. The rulemaking represents a change in tack from the agency, which has previously said such guidelines were unnecessary for orthotic braces.

Stabilizing braces can be fitted to certain handguns but are widely used on the AR-15 platform and other firearms that meet the ATF’s definition of pistols. The attachment was initially designed as an orthotic device to help people with physical disabilities operate a firearm. According to the ATF, there are millions of pistol braces in use across the country.

Although it was set to go into effect this month, the rule was temporarily put on hold in May by the Fifth Circuit. The New Orleans-based appeals court enjoined the new regulations while it litigates a challenge from a coalition of pro-gun lobbying groups.

Congressional Republicans and gun lobbyists have said that the ATF rule criminalizes gun owners who use stabilizing braces — pointing in particular to disabled veterans.

“This rule usurps the legislative power of this body, and this rule should offend every member of this body,” Cline complained Monday. “The pistol brace rule exceeds the ATF’s statutory authority.”

However, supporters of the rulemaking have pointed out that many of the guns used in high-profile mass shootings have been equipped with stabilizing braces and argue that these attachments make such events more lethal.

Proponents of reclassifying pistol braces have also argued that the gun lobby, and some gun owners, are aware that such attachments are a legal end-run around federal laws governing rifles. During a March hearing in the House Judiciary Committee, Maryland Democrat Jamie Raskin showed a video compilation of firearms reviewers openly suggesting that stabilizing braces can be legally used in place of a shoulder stock.

“There really is no difference in the power and potential violence of the weapon, and there is very little difference in the weapon’s design,” Raskin said at the time.

The ATF has said that its rulemaking does not apply to pistol braces purely designed as orthotics that do not allow the user to shoulder the firearm.

Clyde appeared confident last week that his bill would get a vote in the House as scheduled. In a tweet Thursday, the Georgia congressman shared the House Rules Committee’s meeting schedule for Monday and announced that the lower chamber would consider the pistol brace measure this week.

“I will never stop fighting to protect Americans’ Second Amendment freedoms,” Clyde wrote.

A spokesperson for the lawmaker’s office did not immediately return a request for comment on the measure’s prospects amid the continuing intraparty standoff.

Even if Clyde’s measure manages to evade the Republican squabbling and pass the House this week, it has very little chance of successfully navigating the Democrat-controlled Senate and a likely veto from President Joe Biden.

Meanwhile, Republican leadership has signaled that an end to the intraparty discord may still be some ways off. North Carolina Congressman Patrick McHenry told reporters on Capitol Hill Monday that a resolution could be “hours or days away.”

Speaker McCarthy controls a four-seat majority in the House, a narrow margin which the 45-member Freedom Caucus has demonstrated it is willing to exploit for concessions. The bloc needed just 11 votes Tuesday to bring legislative business to a screeching halt.

While the motivation for the insurgency hasn’t been firmly established, some members of the Freedom Caucus such as North Carolina Congressman Dan Bishop have railed on McCarthy for what they see as steamrolling some lawmakers’ concerns on a compromise negotiated with the White House early this month that averted a national debt crisis.

Follow @BenjaminSWeiss

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Email *

Submit